User talk:Raijen
Categories I've been correcting typos found by spellchecking random pages while i'm between calls at work, and noticed a few pages that don't have categories. I tried adding a category tag to Ship upgrades, but it doesn't appear in the actual category page -- is there something that i've missed? Thanks :) :That article appears for me in Category:Concepts, so it looks like you did it right. Perhaps you hit a cached version of the page. Welcome to the Galciv Wiki, and thanks for taking the time to help out! -- 23:51, 3 March 2006 (UTC) Nice Work Nice job cleaning up the Dead-end page. Dead-ends aren't ALWAYS bad, but I definitely prefer seeing an empty list there. That, as well as orphaned pages, unused files, uncategorized pages... well. You get the idea. Just wanted to compliment you on your tidying up. (Don't worry about the uncategorized pages list, as I plan on eliminating that tomorrow.) --Steelviper 04:08, 7 March 2006 (UTC) :Noticed your discussion with Green in the recent changes so I wasn't going to touch the categories. :Is there a quick way to get at the orphans list? A little late tonight (I edit the pages between calls at work and I'm off in about 1/2 hour) so I'll dig in tommorow -- 04:22, 7 March 2006 (UTC) ::All the toolkits are in the . Fortunately the are already cleared (for now). Actually, most of the mopwork seems taken care of. The only things I can think of are the uncategorized (tomorrow), the unused files (I may start a project to find homes for those, or delete them if they aren't being used, similar to this), and the . I guess you could update the "wanted" section on the main page, but that shouldn't take long. Just grab some of the top (non-user) offenders. People seem to have made pretty decent progress at getting those knocked down once posted on the main page. Ooh. And templates. I've started looking at the formatting of the minor races (though the major races could use something too). If we could settle on a sharp, uniform format for presenting the race data it'd be nice. We wouldn't have to actually use a template (we could just use tables), but it's an excellent opportunity to learn about templates if you're interested. There's ALWAYS something to do. I think I put some other ideas on my user page. --Steelviper 05:12, 7 March 2006 (UTC) Tech table :Copied from Talk:HyperDrive -- 22:50, 7 March 2006 (UTC) Cool! Before you get too far, you may want to think about using a template in this case. There are going to be a TON of techs by the end, and it might be nice to have a flexible way to change their formatting. Also, maybe consider moving the long description out of the box, and right justifying the table. That'd be more uniform with how wikipedia (and a lot of other wiki's) tend to format. That way there'd be an easier section to add/remove text/notes/commentary, while still retaining the cool/uniform table/template. Just my 2 cents. --Steelviper 21:49, 7 March 2006 (UTC) :I would second the template idea. You just need to set one up using the current framework, and then we can modify it later and all the pages will change to match. -- 22:49, 7 March 2006 (UTC) ::Do you have any advice or links that'd help me with making/using templates? I'm still somewhat of a wiki-newbie -- 23:14, 7 March 2006 (UTC) :::This would be a good start. I'd reccomend "named parameter substitution" as described towards the top of it. Basically you'll just paste the structure you have into Template:Technology (or whatever you call it) and replace the actual values with the parameters. Then on the pages you would call {Technology| prereqs = blah | leadsto = foo} and blah and foo would be filled in where you specify in the template. Not much more to it than that. Also of note, any line breaks will have to coded in as br/'s since actually putting a break into the template calling syntax breaks up the command. (That'd mainly be an issue with techs with multiple leads to values). So you just have a list separated by br/'s when you call it. --Steelviper 23:32, 7 March 2006 (UTC)